When I proposed importing gcc-5 to EPEL6 back in 04/2016 (
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproj...
) the response was an unequivocal no, EPEL does not install to /opt/ , so it
dies right there.
Now you are proposing the same ( devtoolset/scl installs to /opt except for
the wrapper call) but using a scheme that is somewhat less convenient (In
scl the binutils and gcc have to be coupled, and as noted the imported gcc
suite is incomplete), much less frequent (the most updated version is
gcc-5.2, while I maintain both gcc-5.x and gcc-6.1), and much less complete
(I import everything but gcc-gnat, while devtoolset4 only has gcc,gcc-c++
and gcc-gfortran. No gcc-objc, no gcc-go, no cpp, and none of the libs
(cilk, gccjit, atomic, asan etc...).
I'm still building and maintaining both gcc and bintutils for my own
purposes, which are based off of fc24 srpms, and with optionally gcc-c++
specs file hardcoded to use binutils tools at the new prefix so use of
env-modules is not required.
I'm just wandering why the different treatment - the automatic knee-jerk
reaction of dismissal to a newbie proposal vs. accepting the exact same
proposal (although wrapped so it's less convenient to use) when it comes
from someone else.
You are misreading both responses. There is no knee-jerk acceptance
and there wasn't a knee jerk dismissal because you were a newbie.
Please don't find malice where none was intended.
--
Stephen J Smoogen.